John-David Dalton wrote:
Also note that "[[Class]]" doesn't actually exist as string valued per object
state in many implementations. That is one of the problems with the current spec, it
creates the impression that it such state actually exists.
Sounds like a per implementation issue/detail. I'm sure there are lots
of internal corners cut in every implementation.
No, we do not want normative spec language requiring a per-object
private-named property that determines the
Object.prototype.toString.call(x).slice(8,-1) result.
Doing this naively will both impose unacceptable overhead *and* allow
type-confusion attacks.
I sympathize with your goal of avoiding two cases, native and host, one
of which enumerates cases, the other underspecified -- with the
private-name override applying only to the non-enumerated cases. We
should try to unify machinery where we can. Not at the price of
per-instance "class-name".
/be
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
